|
I can see fast shutter speeds being relevant for some people but flash sync speeds really don't matter with 35mm. I mean who is going through all the trouble to overpowering the sun with flash and make the shot with a 35mm? Inside 1/60th is just as good as 1/250th.
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2012 11:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 13:42 |
|
|
maxmars posted:I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing, I sure like to be able to select 1/250 when I shoot pics of moving people in the evening (e.g. my kids playing). Right but the flash duration is what freezes motion. So 1/125th or 1/60th will work just as well unless you doing some crazy bouncing. I used to get sharp photos of moving people at weddings just fine down to 1/30th and lower. Fast sync speeds are pretty much exclusively so that you can drown out all the ambient light because when you use strobes that is all your shutter speed determines.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2012 12:59
|
|
|
DrNewton posted:I am glad to catch the Nikon thread while opening up. I just bought my first DSLR yesterday. D3100 85-55V or something. Got it at a really good price. No advise until we get catte pics. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2012 13:06
|
|
|
The 35mm f/1.4 AIS Nikkor is not a good lens. It's only draw was that it was faster than any other 35mm you could get for your Nikon. If you are gonna go the AIS lens route just get a 35 or 28mm f/2. You seriously won't miss the extra stop on a modern cameraand they are both sharp wide open.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2012 16:38
|
|
|
krooj posted:Interesting - I don't do any video, but I remember overhearing something about how the D600 won't do automatic aperture adjustment while filming video. Supposedly, you have to step up to the D800 for that feature. Did you checkout the Panasonic GH3? It's just been released, so I'm not sure if it's widely available, but is supposed to do video _very_ well. Dunno squat about m4/3 lenses, though. For the record no AIS lens or any other manual focus Nikon mount lens for that matter will do automatic aperture adjustment with any camera.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2012 16:42
|
|
|
1st AD posted:True story, I actually have no idea how to use the matrix metering with any degree of accuracy. I just set it to spot meter and point the camera at varying spots in the frame where brightness differs and make sure that nothing's gonna be too blown out. To use matrix metering with accuracy point the camera at stuff. Matrix uses the whole frame and a massive database if images to select the best exposure. The only thing you need to do is pay attention and if the setting looks off set some compensation for that lighting scenario (not often).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2012 20:24
|
|
|
Wanna pet that dogge.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2012 16:09
|
|
|
Harsher chemicals might take the printed labeling of of the lens barrels but as long as you don't soak them anything that is safe to clean plastics with is fine. Don't be to excited about the 18-35mm it's kinda meh, I used to have a 24mm AFD and it was nice though.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2012 04:25
|
|
|
BonoMan posted:I was testing a co-worker's old 50mm 1.4 AI (no "s"... blue max aperture marking) on my D600 and it mounted fine, but when I take a pic there's a slight resonance noise and I feel like the camera jiggles ever so slightly. So I looked at the lens while I snapped a pic and it definitely wiggles a hair when I take a pic. What's causing this? It takes some nice images so I'd like to have it as a backup, but not if it's going to damage my camera by being on it. It's not going to hurt your camera unless it's like hella broken. If the photos are sharp it's probably just the mirror returning causing the camera to shake.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2013 01:30
|
|
|
nielsm posted:AI lenses (without CPU) will meter on cameras that have the AI sensing tab on the lens mount. It just so happens that the lack of AI tab on the lens mount is what makes it safe to mount unconverted pre-AI lenses on D5xxx, D3xxx and D40 series, so it's both a blessing and a curse. I have successfully mounted non AI lenses on a D700 and D200. Depending on the lens, sometimes the aperture ring doesn't always press on the AI tab.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2013 05:30
|
|
|
Buy film shoot, that F3.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2013 03:24
|
|
|
The F3 is worth money because it is a very desirable camera, other old stuff might not be worth much at all.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2013 08:39
|
|
|
Tusen Takk posted:So, here are my [terrible] attempts at using the Nikon F3. Most of them are shaky, blurry, or over-exposed, and I think it may be half from the ISO 400 film that I used (the only film I could find, my dad said he used to shoot with ISO 100 and swore by it) and half from my lighting/aperature setting. For the most part, I left it at 4, but occasionally I'd switch it to 32 just to see what happens. Your shutter speed was too low for most of these. Inside light is much darker than you would think it is ISO 400 film with an f/4 lens is really only gonna work in well lit rooms. I recommend you read up on how exposure works and then forget your camera has an auto mode until you get a handle on it. Oh and get us more photos of that dog (and any cats in the vicinity as well).
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2013 13:48
|
|
|
A nonHP F3 is worth less than $200 unless the person buying it is an idiot. You will definitely make money by selling it just don't expect it to fully fund a decent DSLR.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2013 04:34
|
|
|
junto a la luna posted:
That is a cap for the viewfinder so that stray light won't affect the meter should you be silly enough to use auto on long exposures. It is basically completely useless except in very specific circumstances.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2013 14:57
|
|
|
beergod posted:So I bought an SB-700 from a local retailer today. Every time I turn it on it sort of makes a grinding sound and the Zoom says "ERR" on the LCD. It's trying to say "ZOOM ERRDAY" but the Lcd is too small. Nikon design defect.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2013 05:13
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:
Except your posting (because it's bad).
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2013 00:45
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Nothing alike because my posts are too RAW for this thread Voted: Post most likely to give you salmonella 2013.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2013 09:33
|
|
|
DanTheFryingPan posted:Whoa there, no one's recommended the manual focus 105mm f/2.5? Small, fairly light, tack sharp, cheap. The 105mm f/2.5 AI is goddamn legendary and any Nikon mount shooter that doesn't own one is dumb.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2013 17:19
|
|
|
Protons posted:85mm is the stock lens that came with the camera. I'm thinking something that goes up to 200mm? Nothing autofocus at that price (that's any good at least). The closest you are gonna come to is the 180mm f/2.8 AIS or 80-200mm f/4 AIS, both of which I have heard good things about. I would also consider a 105mm f/2.5 because it's a legendary portraitmaker, can be had for under $200 and you don't need 200mm to photograph people.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2013 13:22
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:It was an F100. Because the F100 is a baller rear end camera.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2013 09:19
|
|
|
Moon Potato posted:Some of the old non-AI Nikkors have a bit of a lip on the aperture ring that keeps them from mounting properly on newer F-mounts (like the original 50/1.4) and would need to be "cut to AI" to mount on your D5100. Otherwise, shoot away... and watch your histograms because they won't meter on your camera. I have mounted a nonAI 50mm on D70, D100, D200, and D700 without issue. YMMV on other nonAI lenses though.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2013 05:30
|
|
|
Moon Potato posted:Is it the 1959 model with the "amber" coating? I inherited one of those and it won't mount on my D90. There was no 1959 F mount 50m f/1.4 http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/50mmnikkor/index2.htm . You sure that isn't a 58mm or an f/2?
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2013 06:07
|
|
|
1st AD posted:I have one of those 50 1.4's, they don't mount properly on anything except my FE film body. Not sure if it's a 1959 version or whatever but it is definitely a 50 1.4 and looks just like that 58mm lens. Well they mount on D70, D100, D200, and D700s just fine. The aperture ring does not interfere with the AI coupling ring on those models, the lip ends up above it.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2013 06:57
|
|
|
Weird. That's why I say YMMV when it comes to non AI because the official word is they doesn't work with newer mounts but in practise... 
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2013 08:39
|
|
|
1st AD posted:What's a good long lens that has similar visual characteristics to an AIS 50 1.4? I love the poo poo out of that lens for video work, even the weird purple CA visible when it's wide open, and generally I'll either pull back or use crop mode on my D600 in order to avoid changing lenses. So is there something in the 105-135mm range that has similar characteristics? I would look into the 105mm f/2.5 or f/1.8 AIS.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2013 08:02
|
|
|
Remo posted:I saw some charts where people test the actual ISO vs the stated ISO of cameras, and there are some cameras which have slight deviations. E.g. the camera's 12,800 ISO ends up being only 10,000 ISO. Basically its the manufacturer fudging the numbers. Not very noticeable in real life generally though. The highest actual tested and assigned ISO is 10,000. Anything higher is a manufacturer extrapolated number.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2013 04:16
|
|
|
nielsm posted:If you want beautiful bohkeys try out the 105mm f/2.5, it's amazing I have made your post more correct.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2013 09:30
|
|
|
Beastruction posted:I don't have a thousand bucks to spend on a lens, and it's too useful a focal length to only have one of. Uh...get a 70-200mm, an AI 135mm, or some variation thereof that fits your price range. We absolutely do not need more than one autofocus 135mm prime.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2013 05:26
|
|
|
On small formats 135mm is an exotic focal length. The only reason it exists is because it was the longest lens to which a rangefinder could be coupled. You can't really compare it to 85mm or 35mm and be serious.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2013 06:25
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:The 135 f/2.8 E-Series owns serious bones if you can give up precious AF for a a really awesome lens. Pffft that's nothing, I have a 240mm lens that takes 52mm filters (it's an f/9 LF lens  ).
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2013 12:18
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Just a reminder that there's literally no reason not to buy a 105/2.5 unless you are a chump. This. The 105mm f/2.5 one of the best lenses Nikon has ever made.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2013 06:35
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:All this autism and the term "entrance pupil" wasn't used once?  Don't give away the title of the XXX parody video version.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2013 12:00
|
|
|
entr0py posted:Since there's been some recent discussion about it, anyone have some opinions on the 85mm 1.8G vs the 105mm 2.5? I'm on DX (D7100) and my only other lenses are the 35mm 1.8G and the 18-105mm kit. I almost exclusively use the 35mm for mostly casual portrait photography and I'm looking to complement it with another lens. Looking to spend no more than ~$500, so I could perhaps consider a zoom lens like the 18-200mm (buying used), as well. I don't know much about the 85mm G but the 105mm destroys the old 85mm any day of the week, especially wide open.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2013 18:13
|
|
|
KEH has an UG grade one touch 80-200mm listed for $205 but frankly if it's so hosed that no one will touch it I wouldn't pay real money for it. Offer them $100 or something.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2013 12:06
|
|
|
Kenshin posted:I'm looking at getting a good telephoto lens to go birding with but with my D3200 I'm having trouble finding much of a range of options that will still support autofocus since the body doesn't have a motor, so I'm dependent on the lens. You could rent online, looks like lensrentals.com rents Sigmas.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2013 04:56
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:300mm is a bit short for bird photography. It can be done but I can pretty much guarantee you will be wishing for more reach real quick and those slower lenses won't take a teleconverter. Maybe look at the Nikon 80-400 VR? Not sure how those rate but some versions seem to sell used for around the same amount as the sigma 150-500, ~$700 or so going by ebay. I'd trust nikon glass over an older sigma or tamron. The old 80-400mm doesn't have AFS and the new one is crazy expensive.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2013 16:35
|
|
|
Anyone that uses an OEM strap over a Domke Gripper is a monster.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2013 02:31
|
|
|
I think I paid around $300 for my 28m f/2 AIS and it's a great lens. I know there's a 24mm f/2 AIS but no idea how much they run for or if they are any good. If you absolutely must have autofocus Sigma made a 20mm f1.8 but it wasn't very good and used copies run over $400 for some reason.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2013 15:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 13:42 |
|
|
Jimmy Thief posted:It will look neat and go well with my fixie and giant novelty beard. Beards own.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2013 01:48
|
|